A microbial assessment of instrumentation and noninstrumentation laser disinfection technique: An in vivo study
Aim: The present study aimed to compare the reduction in microbial count of instrumentation versus noninstrumentation laser disinfection technique. Methods: Thirty patients with periapical lesions ranging 3–5 mm in single-rooted teeth were selected for the study. The groups were divided into two mai...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Endodontology : journal of Indian Endodontic Society 2024-04, Vol.36 (2), p.138-142 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Aim: The present study aimed to compare the reduction in microbial count of instrumentation versus noninstrumentation laser disinfection technique. Methods: Thirty patients with periapical lesions ranging 3–5 mm in single-rooted teeth were selected for the study. The groups were divided into two main groups: Group 1 – instrumentation technique and Group 2 – noninstrumentation technique subjected to laser disinfection. Group 2 was again subdivided into two groups: Group 2A – only laser disinfection and Group 2B – laser disinfection and medicament. The groups were analyzed for the reduction in microbial count. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare mean differences in colony-forming unit (CFU) counts. Post operative mean CFU between the three groups were compared using Dunn’s Post Hoc analysis. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: Significant differences were noted in mean CFU counts between Group 1 and Groups 2A and 2B (P = 0.006 and P = 0.001, respectively). Among Groups 2A and 2B, the reduction in the microbial count of Group 2B is better than 2A although not significant. Conclusion: Significant shifts were observed in both the groups, but the impact of the shift was greater in the laser-assisted groups. Noninstrumentation laser disinfection technique shows promising results when compared to conventional techniques. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0970-7212 2543-0831 |
DOI: | 10.4103/endo.endo_160_23 |